Just to play devils advovate here for a second - on what basis have you assumed I am a man? My name? You've never seen a photo of me (not that that would be an indicator either) so why have you presumed I am? I expect someone will quote this with the perennially unfunny and overdone 'did you just assume my gender' but I'm interested, considering the only thing you know of me is the text you're reading on a screen

Considering I'm a feminist, please don't patronise me by pointing out facts I already know. For what it's worth, many women who've I spoken to about this issue agree with me and don't understand why toilets are segregated and would have no issue using a unisex toilet (I get the feeling people tend to misunderstand what they actually are too, generally they're not a room full of cubicles in the regular sense but rather a collection of disabled-esque toilets that are little rooms with a floor to ceiling door and sink). Perhaps as the article surmised, it's a millennial thing.

The solution then - if people wish to continue operating on futile gendered lines - is to provide three sets of toilets, to give everyone a choice. Because while you're sat here (partially justified) lecturing me on how a woman's feelings are important to this issue, you're forgetting that if you aren't trans yourself, you aren't considering the experiences of trans people. It works both ways.

I don't think it would open the can of worms you think it would. Put it this way, there is no reason why at this moment a 'biological' female (for arguments sake we'll say in the possession of breasts and a vagina) who identifies as a female but has a beard and short hair (i.e. is 'unfeminine' in their appearance) couldn't and wouldn't enter a woman's toilet. What happens then? If we separate toilets on sex, the only way it could be policed would be through mandatory and intrusive inspection upon entry.

What this of course comes down to is the problematic and silly ideas about how both women and men should dress and appear to the world. We need to stop assuming that women and men must both dress and appear a certain way before they can be assumed to be 'real' men and women because our ideas of what constitute 'proper' masculinity and femininity are culturally formed.

Correct, but is it overwhelmingly committed in public toilets by strangers? I'm guessing not.

I don't particularly want to get into this now but I'm actually writing an entire chapter of my dissertation on this, one I only began after having discovered through reading that it's not actually as unproblematic as one might assume (I used to hold the same position that you did up until a couple of months ago). So come back to me in three months, and I should hopefully be able to go into this a bit deeper :laugh:

Again, would rather have this discussion in a couple of months but on the slightly related issue of sexuality, demarcating one's sexual desires into neat little categories is also problematic and not as inherent as you might think. The work of Michel Foucault points to how discourses around sex brought into being the identity categories we work with today.

can people get real and realise that 3 types of toilets will never happen DUE TO COST AND SPACE

:facepalm:

Reminds me of those establishments who break disability laws by not providing access under the guise of 'COST AND SPACE WASNT ACCOMMODATING SOZ x'

Money might be everything to you LT but not it's not to everyone. And anyway, if we follow your line of thinking then the logical solution to save 'COST AND SPACE' is actually to provide unisex toilets, not two. But somehow I'm guessing that's not your real agenda...

The minute you change a routine installation like like loos you add cost so it wont happen. No point thinking it will. The numbers here are so minute the best solution is to go at home of just use the disabled toilet which is already in situ

It will happen if people campaign for it and generationally it becomes a more socially acceptable idea. Again, I'm sure many people thought desegregation in the US would never happen but it did. I have every belief that in fifty years time this won't be the issue it is now

'Go at home' is not entirely practical and although we're all guilty of it I don't think more people should be encouraged to use disabled toilets if they don't need to

Who is going to campaign for it? most people actually dont kick up a fuss about this trans-gendered in a bathroom

Are you sure about that? Have you seen the reaction in the States about this issue? The protests? No?

It will happen, just not anytime soon. But I don't know why I'm bothering to reply because three posts down the line you'll be calling me daffodil and saying you're done so

The UK is a more understanding country then the USA

Well, I wouldn't go too far on that but I guess to an extent we finally agree?

I mean this country has done **** loads for the LGBT community

In some ways, yes

Neither cost nor space are particularly relevant when considering NEW establishments though. It's very rare for toilets to be so small that they couldn't be divided again by a third option. It's barely more than the addition of a few partition walls.

In some cases it would honestly be a cheaper option. My shop for example has a men's with two cubicles plus three urinals, an individual ladies, and an individual disabled. A waste of space AND money as really all we need is the two individual ones. In fact half the time that's what IS used because the men's is perpetually out of order due to shoddy pipework... We just let the men use whichever of the ladies / disabled is available.

Thus far though, you've refused to comment on the idea of admitting that not all establishments can be required to change immediately, but that new designs should change going forward. I suspect like Jack, to be honest, that you still wouldn't like that and your talk of cost and space is a smoke screen for just straight up not wanting it to happen...

Also interesting to this topic: even though out ladies is simply ONE toilet plus sink behind one locking door... I have previously had to stick a big handwritten sign simply saying "toilet!" over the ladies toilet sign, because some of the men "aren't going to use the ladies, are ye joking???" :facepalm:. Cover up the little picture of a stick person in a dress and they're suddenly fine with it. Bizarre.

Well it doesn't need to be policed though? It hasn't been policed ever and oddly enough trans people have been using their preferred sex areas with no/little fuss? The honour system works pretty well IMO. Granted I only know 2 trans women, but they are both fine with the way things are now...one 'passes' easily, the other not so much in proper lighting anyway, but she has still never ever been challenged in the ladies...I know a load of lesbians also who are extremely butch and have never had issues.

For anyone wodnering how I know so many LGBT people...when I go out we go to the 'pink triangle' which is the gay bars and such :p
I don't really get this 'we would have to check for vaginas' thing if I am honest. Its fairly easy to tell males from females. And if it isn't, then the person obviously 'passes'.


I don't think there is data on this. Also currently the data would say n o I expect. But...opening areas to everyone would change the data. There are many examples of places in America who have allowed the 'whatever sex you feel you are' and because of this, pervs HAVE taken advantage. There is actually a site that lists all of these instances and there are over a hundred in a short space of time. This tells me that yes, this would be a problem if it happened here.


I don't really understand this part. Are you going into how 'sex' is a social construct in your dissertation? if so, I know this is personal but when you have done it, could I read it? As I honestly cannot see this at all. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. Yes you get 'mistakes' of nature which results in some people being intersex. But this does not mean there are more than 2 sexes. Anymore than the fact that some people are born without arms and legs does not mean that human beings do not as a species have 2 arms and 2 legs. Natures 'mistakes' do not change reality. All in my opinion of course. I am open to change too as always but as it stands, I do not believe sex is a social construct. And I don't believe anyone can ever change sex. However I do believe 'gender' is a social construct. And that gender should be abolished completely as this would end so many problems. I kind of feel that for example, a male who likes wearing dresses feels he HAS to say he is trans to be accepted...which is ****ing wrong. If we get rid of the silly 'boys must do X and girls must do X' 'rules' that society has then I think we would see a decline in the amount of people who are 'trans' and it would just go back to those who have sex dysphoria being trans...as trans really is all about the dysphoria and again, I do not understand those who say it is not.


I would disagree with this tbh. Most people know for sure if they are gay, straight or bi. Most gay men would be disgusted at the thought of shagging a female person, even if they 'presented' male and vice versa. Lesbians do not do penis anymore than gay men perform cunnilingus. Even bi people my not be impressed by someone who looks female but has a dick. Of course pansexuals are perfectly fine with anyone (within their tastes...not meaning they would shag ANYTHING :laugh: ) but generally..I do think sexuality is pretty simple. Either you are attracted to the opposite sex, the same sex, or both. Unless I have misunderstood what you are saying here...

The problem here is, the most vocal transactivists do NOT want unisex facilities. They want into the female areas. Unisex is not what they campaign for, or want. One might ask, why? Unisex (where possible) is the obvious solution, and these people have a very loud voice, so why not campaign for something that will help them, whilst making others feel more comfortable also? Sometimes it really seems like they (transactivists, not transgender people) just want to make others feel uncomfortable and take away their rights to privacy from males...rather than want, as they claim 'somewhere to pee'

So what are transgendered people supposed to do? Go to a bathroom where they dont belong and be bullied in? Not pee? Or as some would say dont change sexes?

I have read some comments about this issue saying "be happy with the sex you born in, deal with it" We all need to listen other people more and try to understand their problems, thats why we are all living together. Just because you dont understand, it is not your problem or you feel secure in your sex doesnt mean you should just wait other people to apply for your way of living.

Also LT if it does cost more money.. So be it. Money is just a stupid piece of paper that humanity created. It has no values without human lifes.

Gender is a social construct though. And sexed areas are separated by...sex. Sex is unchangeable, though science has made it possible to imitate the opposite sex, which has made a lot of people happy. If you 'pass' or could pass, fine. If not, then its kinda unfortunate but these areas are still separated by sex, for now anyway. Once 'gender' trumps sex, both male and female areas will be open to literally anyone. As 'gender' is all in someones head...so...anyone could be male or female whenever they chose to be. I may use this to escape the queues in the womens, though not too sure I could put up with the smell from the urinals...

i mixed it up , now i fixed it

The 'bullied in the mens room' argument doesn't really hold up either, as there have been no attacks on transgender people in mens toilets (there ARE reports of transgender people attacking others in the bathroom of their 'preferred sex' though), none on record anyway. On the other hand there are hoards of reports about gay men being beaten up in loos. Does this mean gay men should be in the womens also as they are bullied and in danger?

Or is the answer to tackle toxic masculinity and the male violence, that everyone seems to be scared of...

People say 'oh, if a transwoman attacks you in the womens there are laws to protect you' and such. But equally, this is true the opposite way. If a transwoman was attacked in the mens, there are the same laws that could be used. So I kinda...don't get it. Though I do understand why not many people like to use the mens...given the amount of violence committed by males for random reasons.

Just because there hasnt been reported many crimes so far that doesnt mean there wont be/there havent been. Transgendered people are VERY vunerable in this type of crimes.

Everyone should get educated better. It breaks my heart to hear that amount of bullying taking place not just for lgbt but for everyone they dont see "fitting in" in schools. Headmasters/teachers should not be afraid and they should take action and punish the violent people harshly.

^^^^^ It is not really a problem in the UK

Totally agree.You can't change sex.'Gender' seems to be a state of mind but that doesn't and can't effect sex.That is unchangable no matter how many ops are carried out.
The seperation of toilets is based on sex.
I've been to clubs with unisex toilets and it didn't really bother me except the lack of urinals and having to lift the pissy seat up to take a pee.
I don't think the privacy thing bothers men tbh.I been in nightclubs where women would run in and look at your dick while your taking a piss and sometimes try and grab it i was'nt bothered.
However women need their space and womens rights should'nt be violated just to please an extremely small section of society.

Makes sense why those type of women may be happy for unisex bathrooms, I think most of the rest are not though. Also women generally don't want to use 'pissy' seats. Yuk!

Men don't have to sit down, women do - it's unfair to expect women to put up with that. I also agree that all women should not effectively be penalised, in more ways than one, to please as you say a very small section of society.

Most of the clubs I go to have...unofficial unisex facilities. meaning they have male and female but anyone uses either. Its not uncommon to see a couple of gay guys in the womens doing their makeup in the mirror or something (as mens don't have a big mirror apparently...which is odd)

Everyone accepts this as...well in the gay clubs and that you are in 'their territory'

Unisex has never ever bothered me (though I wouldn't feel comfortable changing clothes infront of men. But I don't feel comfortable changing infront of other women either tbh). However, this may well be because I have had in my life, no reason to fear men. I have been lucky enough to have never been attacked by a male, sexually or otherwise. A hell of a lot of women are NOT as lucky as I have been, and I do think they should be considered in all of this.

In Newcastle? Legit my favourite place, I used to go there all the time when I started drinking before I moved away :flutter:

Indeed. I know its an absolute dump but I LOVE 'the bank'. It stinks, its always dirty, but the drag queens are mint and it just feels so...homely :laugh: We tend to sit in the beer garden bit mostly. My first date with my husband was actually in 'the dog' (which has sadly changed its name recently :( )

The eagle scares the **** out of me. I only went in there once, was told of the bondage room and glory holes, and then I noticed a USED CONDOM behind me on the seat so njust...nope. never been back :D